An Italian Windows site called "Windowsette" has published some purported secret Microsoft documents outlining some design and strategy plans for Windows 8. The Microsoft Kitchen blog has provided some analysis of the documents. The documents appear genuine, and there's lots of interesting information there.

From what I see it appears that the appstore will be run by the OEM rather than Microsoft; a central repository isn't needed but rather infrastructure in the OS itself which allows one to add repositories so that multiple ones can exist

So I guess it will be in fact like Linux. Bummer, I was hoping for only one repository, instead of 9,000 Really, they should be DISCOURAGING OEMs from dicking with the default setup instead of encouraging it. These OEMs are shipping out PCs loaded down with craplets and other undesirables, and then end users end up blaming Microsoft/Windows for the negative consequences. "Oh gee, my computer is running really slow. Surely it's not because of the 30 trial applications the vendor installed that's running at startup. It must be Microsoft's fault ...'

So I guess it will be in fact like Linux. Bummer, I was hoping for only one repository, instead of 9,000 Really, they should be DISCOURAGING OEMs from dicking with the default setup instead of encouraging it. These OEMs are shipping out PCs loaded down with craplets and other undesirables, and then end users end up blaming Microsoft/Windows for the negative consequences. "Oh gee, my computer is running really slow. Surely it's not because of the 30 trial applications the vendor installed that's running at startup. It must be Microsoft's fault ...'

If there was one repository then someone will have to manage it and if someone manages it then you're going to have issues arise where updates aren't accepted and propagated in a timely manner. I'd sooner Adobe run their own repository, Microsoft have their own, Apple and so on have their own repositories. They all take care of their own and all the responsibility is on the individual companies involved rather than pushing it off onto a third party whom they cam blame when things go wrong.

The crapware you see is the result of the race to the bottom - OEM's are forced to find new forms of revenue simply to get their margins semi-respectable. If you sold a computer with no crapware tomorrow you'd have idiots jumping onto this very forum whining that the computer is more expensive and how one could easily uninstall all the crapware if one wanted. There is a reason why on average a MacBook costs around $150 more than a comparable laptop being sold in Dick Smiths, because it doesn't have $100 worth of crapware subsidies keeping the price low.

If there was one repository then someone will have to manage it and if someone manages it then you're going to have issues arise where updates aren't accepted and propagated in a timely manner. I'd sooner Adobe run their own repository, Microsoft have their own, Apple and so on have their own repositories. They all take care of their own and all the responsibility is on the individual companies involved rather than pushing it off onto a third party whom they cam blame when things go wrong.

The problem with this scenario is that only the 'big boys' would be able to run their own repository. Otherwise, if you've got every Tom, Dick, and Harry running their own, what's to stop them from putting malware in their repository, if they're the ones managing it?

If you sold a computer with no crapware tomorrow you'd have idiots jumping onto this very forum whining that the computer is more expensive and how one could easily uninstall all the crapware if one wanted.

Eh, I don't personally know any tech savvy people who would complain about having to pay a little more for a machine without crapware. But even if people did, the average consumer is never going to know the difference. And for them, whether they realize it or not, the slightly higher cost of the machine will be well worth not having the crapware in the first place (and the headaches that result from it).